Hi everyone. Thanks for being so patient in waiting for me to get this comparison done. I managed to run the tests this past week on both props. I'm still compiling the results, but when I'm done, I'll post an attachment at the top of this thread.

The results were interesting and really didn't favor either prop in all categories. If anything, I've learned that there are lots of variables when comparing propellers. I ran the Acme first. At some point, I may double check a few of the results as I was less aware of some of the variables when I obtained those results. When I ran the OJ, realizing the presence of such variables, I ran a few more trials and recorded multiple results. I'll probably go with the best numbers. But for these reasons, I may run the Acme again in a few categories just to be sure the results were as accurate as possible. My baselines also seemed a bit skewed at 28 and 30 mph with both props. But they checked out with the GPS so what do I know.

All in all, both props performed well. Some criteria are more a matter of personal preference and one guy's opinion more than anything else. In other words, don't take my results and assume it would work the same on your boat, in your lake, and with your setup. Both of these companies seem to be open to letting the consumer try their product out. Take them up on it. Thanks to OJ for letting me try its prop out and for the prop puller that made swapping the props out take mere minutes.

Thanks to Milkmania for hosting it.

Acme/OJ Propeller Test (http://www.writeonrice.com/shoot-out.htm)

alpace

06-21-2005, 01:11 AM

East,

Can you take a look at my thread 'Uh-oh, 2006 x-30'? I have a prop issue I am trying to resolve and would appreciate your thoughts.

Thanks!

Leroy

06-21-2005, 01:48 AM

Eastie? I'm having trouble understanding this, it's like, hmmmm, it was written by a lawyer! :D One has to be better!

bradamerry

06-21-2005, 02:44 AM

Eastie? I'm having trouble understanding this, it's like, hmmmm, it was written by a lawyer! :D One has to be better!
Thanks Leroy, that will make for a long post that you still can't understand!!!! :confused:

BriEOD

06-21-2005, 07:27 AM

Yeah man I thought you were an English major. All this says is a bunch of humming and hawing.

MarkP

06-21-2005, 09:15 AM

Yeah man I thought you were an English major. All this says is a bunch of humming and hawing.
Uh-Oh,:eek: I understood it, :o .

John B

06-21-2005, 10:02 AM

I understood what Doug was saying.
That he could not tell a big deference between the two props.
He just said all the stuff to make it sound like he was some kind of expert.
It a lawyer thing. Twist things,say a bunch of fancy things to make it sound like you know what your talking about.
Doug which prop has the best price? That is the best one.

MarkP

06-21-2005, 10:07 AM

I understood what Doug was saying.
That he could not tell a big deference between the two props.
He just said all the stuff to make it sound like he was some kind of expert.
It a lawyer thing. Twist things,say a bunch of fancy things to make it sound like you know what your talking about.
Doug which prop has the best price? That is the best one.
Thatís not what I got out of it

John B

06-21-2005, 10:16 AM

What did you get out of it?

ktn_cmu

06-21-2005, 10:19 AM

What I heard was that he was going to post a bunch of numbers and let each of us decide for ourselves which numbers mean more to us than others. Boy oh boy, way to avoid responsibility. Just like a lawyer... :)

east tx skier

06-21-2005, 12:03 PM

ktn_cmu (ding ding ding). You win. I have not posted the results of the prop test yet. I'm going to post an attachment with the results in it. The above is just a preview. It will contain a few opinions where they're pertinent. There are some things you just have to hand to one, the other, or neither/both.

For example, and without spoiling the surprise, as for vibration, or lack thereof, both props were smooth as silk from 26 on up. Neither was better in that department. One prop posted a better top end, while the other was more responsive out of the hole. It will be in the test results, which I will try to compile ASAP.

I'm also going to do my best not to lawyer up the results. But you really can't realize until you get in one of these things how many variables can skew the results. So the numbers I got may differ greatly, for example, to what Brian M gets.

As another example, by the time I put the OJ on, I realized that some of these variables may have limited the numbers on the Acme. With minimal wind, the WOT rpms/speed results varied on the OJ by about 1.5 mph and several hundred rpms going one direction versus the other. Current is minimal where I tested both props. Unfortunately, it did not occur to me to test both ways when I was running the Acme and the results I recorded were going the "slow direction." I may retest this later if I'm so inclined. Or I may report both results as to the OJ with a note that the Acme could potentially gain rpms and speed going the opposite direction (it has posted better numbers in the past).

In the end, it just bugs me that I didn't think of some of these things the first time through. But even considering the variables, as mentioned previously, neither prop dominated all fields. So you need to look at the results and decide which criteria are most important for your needs was what I'll advise.

John B

06-21-2005, 02:56 PM

My main criteria is cost. Doug witch prop wins in that department? :confused:

east tx skier

06-21-2005, 03:43 PM

I purchased my Acme from Schnitz in March 2004 for $293 delivered. I did not purchase the OJ, so I don't know. You could email Schnitz (link at www.schnitzskis.com) for quotes on both props.

On Propellers Online (http://www.propellersonline.com/skiboat.php?PHPSESSID=23db9b7485ca6a5f27a870b9c422 1dc5), they have the Acme 3 blade for $315. This site doesn't have the keyed XMP.
On www.skiertoskier.com, they have 13" OJ XMP 3 blades for $300. Max apparently doesn't carry Acme.

So basically, prices are close. Shop around for the best one.

east tx skier

06-22-2005, 12:56 AM

Okay, we have a slight problem. The write-up is done. It's in an MS Word document (zipped). Due to the numerous pictures, the zipped file is 5.8 mb. That's too big to upload to team talk (max size 2.0 mb). So here's the deal, shoot me an email, and I'll happily send you a copy of the write up.

milkmania

06-22-2005, 01:37 AM

I'll be more than glad to host it for you

like this:
http://www.writeonrice.com/tenkiller/index.html

should be able to get the .doc up there also....I can just make a link for it, and they can download it like this:
http://www.writeonrice.com/ruth_chris.doc

you can e-mail it to bhammon@alltel.net

east tx skier

06-22-2005, 11:34 AM

Thanks, Milkmania. It's coming your way from my gmail address.

milkmania

06-22-2005, 01:59 PM

Thanks, Milkmania. It's coming your way from my gmail address.

here ya go buddy:popcorn:
http://www.writeonrice.com/shoot-out.htm

it was a little bit different than I thought, so I just turned it into an html file.

I was thinking pics & text were seperated, but this works great too

LakePirate

06-22-2005, 02:27 PM

Doug did some great work on this.

Zach S

06-22-2005, 02:58 PM

Excellent work Doug. Some great information.

east tx skier

06-22-2005, 03:06 PM

Thanks. Milk, the formatting looks fine to me. The only thing I noticed is that the labeling in the first picture got moved a little, but you can still tell which prop is which, so I think it's perfectly fine. Thanks again for hosting it.

milkmania

06-22-2005, 03:15 PM

it's fixed now

you're more than welcome

you did a lot of hard work... a ton more than I did:)

east tx skier

06-22-2005, 03:18 PM

It was more work than I anticipated, but interesting. I'll be interested to see how my numbers compare to BrianM's.

BrianM

06-22-2005, 04:19 PM

Yeah thanks for doing a lot of the work. I am going to use your exact format only replacing the photos and numbers with the ones I take/get. I will also replace commentary with my own. This should keep everything very consistent.

I knew if I waited long enough you would do all of the work for me :D

BriEOD

06-22-2005, 04:26 PM

Good work Doug. I bet you hadn't done something like that since college.

east tx skier

06-22-2005, 04:28 PM

Hey, I'm just glad that I didn't somehow mangle the OJ or the Acme last week. I hate messing with stuff I don't own. Both props remain pristine though.

BriEOD

06-22-2005, 04:33 PM

Yeah, that would be my fear.

east tx skier

06-22-2005, 04:35 PM

Good work Doug. I bet you hadn't done something like that since college.

I'm trying to remember. I tend to do tables a lot when I need to get organized. I've probably done it at work a few times when things get complicated, but before that, I'd have to say law school.

milkmania

06-22-2005, 04:50 PM

Doug,
this is going to be YOUR self control test......

one of your words is misspelled......you cannot go back and look for it!
can you handle it???:purplaugh

ski_king

06-22-2005, 04:56 PM

Doug, very nice test!

Maybe you could do one for us now on beer. :friday:

east tx skier

06-22-2005, 05:37 PM

Doug,
this is going to be YOUR self control test......

one of your words is misspelled......you cannot go back and look for it!
can you handle it???:purplaugh

The word "can't" is spelled "cant." I didn't want to bother you with it. Also, there are a few things that are underlined. Again, I didn't want to bother you with it.

east tx skier

06-22-2005, 05:38 PM

Doug, very nice test!

Maybe you could do one for us now on beer. :friday:

Happily. I'd tell you about the great beer review website (http://www.beeradvocate.com/) , but I feel it might make my beer test unnecessary.

milkmania

06-22-2005, 06:13 PM

The word "can't" is spelled "cant." I didn't want to bother you with it. Also, there are a few things that are underlined. Again, I didn't want to bother you with it.

I'm just joshing with ya

:)

gtink

06-22-2005, 06:15 PM

If looks count, I like the smooth edge's of the OJ. :)

BrianM

06-22-2005, 06:21 PM

If looks count, I like the smooth edge's of the OJ. :)

I am just the opposite. I love the Ninja Throwing Star :eek3: look of the Acme.

east tx skier

06-22-2005, 06:39 PM

If looks count, I like the smooth edge's of the OJ. :)

Bear in mind that the Acme isn't quite as photogenic as it was before I ran it on my boat for a year. :)

BrianM

06-22-2005, 06:42 PM

Bear in mind that the Acme isn't quite as photogenic as it was before I ran it on my boat for a year. :)

Take a little Mothers metal polish to it. I did that to my stock prop and it made it shine like new again. But the funk in the water around here makes it dirty again real quick.

east tx skier

06-22-2005, 06:44 PM

I'm a stones throw from Louisiana. We've got a lot of silt on our favoriate lake. Thanks for the tip on the Mothers Metal Polish.

gtink

06-22-2005, 07:00 PM

What about 4 blade vs. 3. any thoughts?

BrianM

06-22-2005, 07:15 PM

What about 4 blade vs. 3. any thoughts?

The question is why? With the new CNC'd props on the market the Acme and OJ XMP there is no need for a four blade prop. These new three blade props give all of the good characteristics of a four blade (better hole shot, improved holding power) with none of the downfalls (loss of top end, wake turbulance). The CNC three blade props have as much surface area as a four blade but in a three blade configuration. This has been made possible by the very small tolerances that are a part of the CNC process. Giving the ability to create a large surface area three blade prop with no vibration.

There are few acceptions put the Powerslot is one. They don't have a good three blade alternative worked out on that transmission yet but last I hear Acme had a prototype that was working well.

redmike

06-22-2005, 09:38 PM

thanks for all of the great info east tex! from the sounds of it, I can't go wrong with either! :toast: to you for all of the info!

east tx skier

06-23-2005, 12:41 AM

The question is why? With the new CNC'd props on the market the Acme and OJ XMP there is no need for a four blade prop. These new three blade props give all of the good characteristics of a four blade (better hole shot, improved holding power) with none of the downfalls (loss of top end, wake turbulance). The CNC three blade props have as much surface area as a four blade but in a three blade configuration. This has been made possible by the very small tolerances that are a part of the CNC process. Giving the ability to create a large surface area three blade prop with no vibration.

There are few acceptions put the Powerslot is one. They don't have a good three blade alternative worked out on that transmission yet but last I hear Acme had a prototype that was working well.

I don't know that the OJ 3 blade has as much surface area as their four blade. It might, but I've never heard them make that claim. That is something that Acme changed about its props a few years ago (not sure on the exact date). As far as how the XMP blade surface area compares, Eric at OJ would be a good one to ask about that.